[OT: WTB] Mountain Bikes

[Mr Ten]

Looking to get a mountain bike, will spend some time on the road, but I remember years ago I would beat my bikes up so I want something tough and solid, hills, jumps, bumps, etc. I've tested these two and liked the first one the best:

 

Gary Fisher: Fat Possum LX

http://www.fisherbikes.com/bikes/large_image.asp?series=am-fs&bike=Fat_possum_LX

 

Trek: Fuel EX7 (also looking at EX8)

http://www2.trekbikes.com/bikes/bike.php?bikeid=1163600&f=14

 

These are what the locals stores seem to specialize in, pinpoint, suggest, etc. The Fisher felt way more solid going over bumps, better travel, and online reviews place it above the Trek as far as durability over time. It's a pricy upgrade to make the rear-shock locking on the Fisher (already on the Trek, not sure if the Fisher will bug me on the streets).

 

Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks in advance.

 

[ant]

You will get used to the rear suspension pretty quickly. You'd probably end up leaving it active even if you had the option to lock it out.

[potaetoes]

avoid lockout. a good suspension design doesn't need it. using lockout shortens the life of the shock significantly, and wears out the suspension bushings much more quickly.

trek = gary fisher
same company

before you lay down your money, go ride a bike with a virtual pivot design. lots of people are moving to that type of design, and for good reason.

[Mr Ten]

Originally posted by ant You will get used to the rear suspension pretty quickly. You'd probably end up leaving it active even if you had the option to lock it out.

 

 

just riding around the lot, the rear suspension bob/lag on the fisher was minimal and didn't bug me really. it's supposed to lock on climbs so that helps. it just felt like a more solid bike so that's what i'm leaning towards. greater shock travel, no frame buckle/shock, nice and rigid.

 

there's so much talk of component upgrades that it feels almost as addicting as amps and pedals, that you want to upgrade the {censored} out of the bike, but it seems more unnecessary here.

 

thanks for the input, i think i want the fisher, just trying to see what other brands i should pay attention to or how they compare... what components are a must have, etc.

[Mr Ten]

Originally posted by potaetoes avoid lockout. a good suspension design doesn't need it. using lockout shortens the life of the shock significantly, and wears out the suspension bushings much more quickly. trek = gary fisher same company before you lay down your money, go ride a bike with a virtual pivot design. lots of people are moving to that type of design, and for good reason.

 

 

i knew they were the same company, nice that you pointed it out.

 

what brands have you seen strike success with the virtual pivot?

[Mr Ten]

Originally posted by potaetoes before you lay down your money, go ride a bike with a virtual pivot design. lots of people are moving to that type of design, and for good reason.

 

 

this is what Titus Bikes says on their site:

 

Bottom Line:

[k4df4l]

IIRC the Fat Possum is reviewed in the current Mountain Bike Action mag.

[potaetoes]

Originally posted by Mr Ten i knew they were the same company, nice that you pointed it out. what brands have you seen strike success with the virtual pivot?

 

 

as far as virtual pivot and DW-link bikes, which are really similar as far as design and funciton, you can find them in anything from giant and iron horse, to santa cruz (owners of the VPP patent), intense, ibis, etc.

 

they can be found across the price spectrum.

 

they all are modified four-bar systems... all the benefits of a true four-bar (such as FSR, XTC, anything with a horst link), with a lot more design control over axle path, less weight, and better structural rigidity.

 

the maverick bikes even work on the same basic concept, despite their appearance.

[Mr Ten]

Originally posted by k4df4l IIRC the Fat Possum is reviewed in the current Mountain Bike Action mag.

I read this review which discusses the straight versus offset forks, noting that the fat possum's inline fork is tougher but aggressive turns are harder than the new Cake model they have, although the offset forks might not be perfectly tuned yet. Thoughts on that?

http://www.mbaction.com/detail.asp?id=1975

[k4df4l]

I don't have the review handy but IIRC handling was one of the issues raised (along with several other gripes). Course saddle time is the best feedback you can get and I haven't ridden one myself.

[potaetoes]

Originally posted by Mr Ten I read this review which discusses the straight versus offset forks, noting that the fat possum's inline fork is tougher but aggressive turns are harder than the new Cake model they have, although the offset forks might not be perfectly tuned yet. Thoughts on that? http://www.mbaction.com/detail.asp?id=1975

three key things to think about

1 - that last paragraph is important. there's no way to know whether even keith and gary have figured out what the best offset is yet, if they're deviating from standards. until a bunch of different offsets are thrown around, it's impossible to know what works best, so buying into it right away might not be a great idea. as with any new thing that pops up in bikes, it's always best to wait a while to see how it pans out. remember, after much fanfare and marketing, fisher's genesis geometry proved to be only marginally accepted by riders. i personally can't stand it compared to traditional geometry, but it works for some.

2 - plenty of manufacturers already do specify different offsets to match different head angles. even on the same model bike, you can often find two or three different offset specs for different size frames. it hasn't been ignored. gary fisher just likes to market his stuff as if nobody ever thought about it before he did, and he always has been that way. it's rarely true. he is usually just the first to slap a name on things other people have already tinkered around with.

3 - MBA is a pretty crappy mag for tech stuff. the only thing they do right is get pictures of new stuff before other people do, and that's why they sell so many copies. the fact that they think offset has been ignored up to this point is evidence to how clueless they are. try to find a bike mechanic somewhere who thinks MBA isn't full of crap 99% of the time... if you can, i'd be amazed. i was one for 15 years, and, well... you know how i feel.

[Mr Ten]

Originally posted by potaetoes three key things to think about 1 - that last paragraph is important. there's no way to know whether even keith and gary have figured out what the best offset is yet, if they're deviating from standards. until a bunch of different offsets are thrown around, it's impossible to know what works best, so buying into it right away might not be a great idea. as with any new thing that pops up in bikes, it's always best to wait a while to see how it pans out. remember, after much fanfare and marketing, fisher's genesis geometry proved to be only marginally accepted by riders. i personally can't stand it compared to traditional geometry, but it works for some. 2 - plenty of manufacturers already do specify different offsets to match different head angles. even on the same model bike, you can often find two or three different offset specs for different size frames. it hasn't been ignored. gary fisher just likes to market his stuff as if nobody ever thought about it before he did, and he always has been that way. it's rarely true. he is usually just the first to slap a name on things other people have already tinkered around with. 3 - MBA is a pretty crappy mag for tech stuff. the only thing they do right is get pictures of new stuff before other people do, and that's why they sell so many copies. the fact that they think offset has been ignored up to this point is evidence to how clueless they are. try to find a bike mechanic somewhere who thinks MBA isn't full of crap 99% of the time... if you can, i'd be amazed. i was one for 15 years, and, well... you know how i feel.

I was thinking the same thing about your first point. Your second point will take some more research here, and I pretty much figured that Gary Fisher is the new specialized (conventional higher-end brand, production package, "ooh aah" sell). Thanks for the info in your third point.

I want to buy a bike within a week, hurting to get back out on the trails, so I've got some learning / research to do. I know I want hydraulic brakes. I'm not familiar with XT, XTR... all that, but it seems like XT is the minimum to go with. Lots of little things, but at this point, I want a solid bike with reasonable upgrades that I can learn uninhibited with until I really decide what to get if I get real serious about it. I know I'm already looking at a serious price range but you know what I mean.

Thanks.

[potaetoes]

gary fisher has always marketed himself as the man who invented mountain biking, ever since mountain biking became popular. he was definitely one of the early pioneers of the sport, but not like he'd like you to believe. in any case, he's not new.


xt is good stuff, but watch out for cheap shifters mixed in. a lot of times you'll see an xt rear derailleur with cheap shifters and cheap front derailleur, which is not good. xt and xtr shifters are the only ones with actual ball bearings in the mechanism, so they'll last years and years without ever getting sloppy or hard to push. lx and lower will degrade steadily with use, at varying rates. lx is decent for a season, but after that... bleh.

anyway, the shifters have more to do with the function and feel of the drivetrain than the derailleurs do, so make sure they're good.

as for the dual control levers or rapid-rise rear derailleurs - that's all a personal call. enough people dislike them that shimano is making them optional (instead of default) for '07 in xtr, and that says a lot.

[Mr Ten]

mongoose? iron horse?

[rho]

I bought my Trek Y-5 a few years ago for $1,500 new... still have it and love it, ride it everyday.

If I had to do it again I would do this. Search Craigslist for used m-bikes and you can probably save 80%+.

I've seen some awesome rides there for insanely low prices.. if it's the right size.. then you are golden!

[potaetoes]

the mongooses are all single-pivot bikes.

they have lots of pivots, but there's only one pivot connecting the rear axle to the frame, which means the axle travels in an arc around that pivot. single-pivot's #1 benefit is the durability of simplicity, and there are lots of great single-pivot bikes out there. adding a bunch of extra monkey motion to a single-pivot bike kinda defeats the purpose. the floating BB can make all kinds of shifting problems, too.